Premium
Arguing for a Negligible Effect
Author(s) -
Rainey Carlisle
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
american journal of political science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.347
H-Index - 170
eISSN - 1540-5907
pISSN - 0092-5853
DOI - 10.1111/ajps.12102
Subject(s) - argument (complex analysis) , simple (philosophy) , politics , epistemology , positive economics , variable (mathematics) , psychology , econometrics , political science , economics , mathematics , philosophy , chemistry , law , mathematical analysis , biochemistry
Political scientists often theorize that an explanatory variable should have “no effect” and support this claim by demonstrating that its coefficient's estimate is not statistically significant. This empirical argument is quite weak, but I introduce applied researchers to simple, powerful tools that can strengthen their arguments for this hypothesis. With several supporting examples, I illustrate that researchers can use 90% confidence intervals to argue against meaningful effects and provide persuasive evidence for their hypothesis.